Disposed¶34

Matoshree Properties v. Aditya Chaitanya Kalyanpur

Bombay HC16 Apr 2025S/166/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Consent Terms disposal of civil suit; deletion of plaintiffs by draft amendment (one deceased, one inadvertently added); verification of Consent Terms by affirming officer; voluntary execution without undue influence or coercion; undertakings accepted as undertakings to the Court; refund of Court fees per Rules; permanent retention of signed Consent Terms on file. High Court of Judicature at Bombay (OOCJ); Suit No.166 of 2024; Interim Application No.1413 of 2024; Matoshree Properties v. Aditya Chaitanya Kalyanpur; Arif S. Doctor, J.; 17 April 2025.

What did the court decide?

Suit disposed of in view of the Consent Terms executed between the parties; interlocutory applications, if any, stand disposed of; undertakings in the Consent Terms accepted as undertakings to the Court; refund of Court fees, if any, in accordance with the Rules.

Matoshree Properties vs Aditya Chaitanya Kalyanpur — Bombay HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶34

Issue for consideration

Whether Plaintiff Nos.2 and 4 should be deleted from the array of the Suit by amendment, Plaintiff No.2 having passed away and Plaintiff No.4 having been inadvertently added as a party. +1 more

¶16

Court's answer

The draft amendment deleting Plaintiff Nos.2 and 4 was taken on record (marked 'X' for identification) and Learned Counsel for the Plaintiff was permitted to carry out the amendments in terms of the draft tendered; the amendments were to be carried out forthwith and re-verification was dispensed with.

¶21

Ratio / Principle

Upon the affirming officer verifying execution of the Consent Terms and the parties assuring that the terms do not affect the right, title and interest of non-signatories and do not travel beyond the scope of the Suit, the Consent Terms were taken on record and marked 'X-1' for identification.

¶33

Key takeaways

The Suit is disposed of in view of the Consent Terms.ratio¶34
Interlocutory Applications, if any, shall also stand disposed of in view of the Consent Terms.ratio¶35
Refund of the Court fees, if any, is directed in accordance with the Rules.ratio¶36

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Bombay High Court, Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction — Suit No.166 of 2024 (with Interim Application No.1413 of 2024), Matoshree Properties & Ors. v. Aditya Chaitanya Kalyanpur & Ors.; coram Arif S. Doctor, J.; decided 17th April 2025. A draft amendment deleting Plaintiff No.2 (deceased) and Plaintiff No.4 (inadvertently joined) was taken on record (marked 'X') and permitted, with re-verification dispensed with. The parties reported settlement; Consent Terms were executed and verified by the Court's affirming officer, whose report recorded that all signatories admitted the contents and signed out of their free will, without undue influence or coercion. On the parties' assurance that the Consent Terms do not affect the right, title and interest of non-signatories and do not travel beyond the scope of the Suit, the Consent Terms were taken on record (marked 'X-1'). The Suit and any interlocutory applications were disposed of in view of the Consent Terms; undertakings therein were accepted as undertakings to the Court; refund of Court fees was directed in accordance with the Rules; and the Registry was directed to permanently retain the hard copy of the signed Consent Terms on file.

¶1

1 907-S 166-24.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION

¶3

SUIT NO.166 OF 2024

¶4

Matoshree Properties & Ors. … Plaintiffs

¶5

V/s.

¶6

Aditya Chaitanya Kalyanpur & Ors. … Defendants

¶7

WITH

¶8

INTERIM APPLICATION NO.1413 OF 2024

¶9

¶10

SUIT NO.166 OF 2024

¶11

Mr. Shashank Sardesai a/w Anoushka Goyal for the Plaintiffs. Mr. Drupad Patil a/w Prasad Keluskar for the Defendants.

¶12

Digitally signed by MUGDHA MUGDHA MANOJ MANOJ PARANJAPE PARANJAPE Date: 2025.04.19 11:55:15 +0530

¶13

CORAM : ARIF S. DOCTOR, J. DATE : 17TH APRIL 2025

¶14

P.C. :

¶15

Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Plaintiffs tenders a

¶16

draft amendment seeking deletion of Plaintiff Nos.2 and 4 on the ground that Plaintiff No.2 has passed away and Plaintiff No.4 has inadvertently been added

¶17

as a party in the array of the Suit. There is no opposition to this. The draft amendment is taken on record and marked ‘X’ for identification.

Mugdha

1 of 4

2 907-S 166-24.doc

Learned Counsel for the Plaintiff is permitted to carry out the amendments in terms of draft tendered.

¶22

Amendments to be carried out forthwith. Re-verification is dispensed with.

¶23

Learned Counsel for the parties submit that the present Suit has now been settled between the parties and seeks to file Consent Terms.

¶24

Since the Consent Terms are not affirmed, let execution of the same be done by the affirming officer of this Court. Hence, the matter is kept back.

¶25

In Chamber

¶26

Learned Counsel for the parties tender Consent Terms by which the disputes and differences between them in the present Suit have been resolved.

¶27

The execution of the Consent Terms has been duly verified by the affirming officer of this Court. A report of the affirming officer has been annexed to the Consent Terms which states that all the signatories have

Mugdha

2 of 4

3 907-S 166-24.doc

admitted contents of the Consent Terms and the Consent Terms are duly signed by the parties out of their free will, without any undue influence and coercion.

¶32

Learned Counsel for the parties assure the Court that these Consent Terms do not in any manner affect the right, title and interest of any parties, who are not signatories to the Consent Terms and do not travel beyond the scope of the captioned Suit.

¶33

By accepting the assurance given by the parties, the Consent Terms are taken on record and marked ‘X-1’ for identification with today’s date.

¶34

The Suit is disposed of in view of the Consent Terms.

¶35

Interlocutory Applications, if any, shall also stand disposed of in view of the Consent Terms.

¶36

Refund of the Court fees, if any, in accordance with the Rules.

¶37

The undertakings, if any, given by the parties in the Consent Terms are accepted as an undertakings given to this Court.

Mugdha

3 of 4

4 907-S 166-24.doc

A soft copy of the Consent Terms will be uploaded as the second order in the matter. The Registry is to ensure that the hard copy of the signed Consent Terms is permanently retained on file as part of the record and is not sent for destruction in the ordinary course.

¶42

(ARIF S. DOCTOR, J.)

¶43

Mugdha

¶44

4 of 4

Matoshree Properties v. Aditya Chaitanya Kalyanpur

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Matoshree Properties v. Aditya Chaitanya Kalyanpur

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Svc Co. Operative Bank Limited vs Manek Nagar Abc Co. Operative Housing Society Ltd.

Svc Co. Operative Bank Limited vs Manek Nagar Abc Co. Operative Housing Society Ltd.

Vibha Sudhir Dubey vs Sudhir Ravishankar Dubey (Deceased)

Bharati Defence and Infrastructure Ltd. vs The Shipping Corporation of India

Sun Pharma Laboratories Limited vs Protech Remedies Pvt. Ltd. and 3 Ors.

Atomberg Technologies Private Limited vs Saakaar Appliances Private Limited